Behavioral Profiles in Sourcing and Recruiting as Part of a Hiring Process

ABSTRACT

A method of selecting potential hires for progression through a hiring process is provided. The method comprises selecting at least one performance indicator for a position, obtaining the at least one performance indicator for a plurality of incumbents in the position, and placing each incumbent in the plurality of incumbents along a performance continuum according to their performance indicator. The method also comprises surveying incumbents from at least both halves of the performance continuum, generating an ideal profile for the position based upon the incumbent survey and the at least one performance indicator of the incumbents, using a survey to generate a candidate profile of a potential hire, comparing the candidate profile of the potential hire with the ideal profile for the position to determine a result for the potential hire, and determining whether to progress the potential hire to a next stage in the hiring process based upon the result.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

None.

STATEMENT REGARDING FEDERALLY SPONSORED RESEARCH OR DEVELOPMENT

Not applicable.

REFERENCE TO A MICROFICHE APPENDIX

Not applicable.

BACKGROUND

A critical component of the success for any organization is the abilityto keep the cost of doing business and growing business at a minimum.Sourcing and recruiting of employees represent a very substantial costwith poor results through turnover and lack of excellent performers andcan lead to erosion of the bottom line. The costs associated withidentifying and hiring a replacement for a vacant position includeadvertising, an employment agency, employee referral award, Internetposting and other forms of announcing the availability of the position.At the next stage, interviews conducted by management and/or hiringdepartment staff will cost money in terms of the time that they spendarranging for interviews, conducting the interviews, calling references,having discussions about the people they met, and notifying candidateswho did not get the job.

For growing organizations, hiring people who are efficient, reliable,and excellent performers for new positions can also reduce the cost ofdoing business. Such employees can help reduce cost by allowing anorganization to operate with a smaller workforce and reduced downtime.Therefore, hiring the right people is a necessity for any organizationin order to reduce the cost of doing business.

SUMMARY

These and other features will be more clearly understood from thefollowing detailed description taken in conjunction with theaccompanying drawings and claims.

In an embodiment of the disclosure, a method of selecting potentialhires for progression through a hiring process is provided. The methodcomprises selecting at least one performance indicator for a position,obtaining the at least one performance indicator for a plurality ofincumbents in the position, and placing each incumbent in the pluralityof incumbents along a performance continuum according to theirperformance indicator. The method also comprises surveying incumbentsfrom at least both halves of the performance continuum, generating anideal profile for the position based upon the incumbent survey and theat least one performance indicator of the incumbents, using a survey togenerate a candidate profile of a potential hire, comparing thecandidate profile of the potential hire with the ideal profile for theposition to determine a result for the potential hire, and determiningwhether to progress the potential hire to a next stage in the hiringprocess based upon the result.

In another embodiment of the disclosure, a system for selectingpotential hires for progression through a hiring process is provided.The system comprises a survey completed by a potential hire for aposition and a plurality of incumbents in the position, the plurality ofincumbents including both high performers and low performers relative toan identified performance indicator. The system also comprises acandidate profile of the potential hire generated by analyzing thesurvey completed by the potential hire, an ideal profile for theposition generated by analyzing the surveys completed by the pluralityof incumbents, and a result for the potential hire generated bycomparing the candidate profile of the potential hire with the idealprofile for the position, wherein a determination of whether to progressthe potential hire to a next stage in the hiring process is made basedupon the result.

In another embodiment of the disclosure, a method of determining anideal range for a behavioral trait for a position at a company isprovided. The method comprises having a plurality of incumbents in aposition complete a survey comprising a group of two or more items, thegroup of items corresponding to the behavioral trait, and the pluralityof incumbents including both high performers and low performers relativeto an identified performance indicator. The method also comprisesplotting the results of the survey for the plurality of incumbents on acontinuum, determining an ideal range for the behavioral trait basedupon the results of the high performers, and determining where the idealrange falls on the continuum, wherein the ideal range is between but notinclusive of the endpoints of the continuum.

In another embodiment of the disclosure, a method of determining themore effective source for sourcing candidates is provided. The methodcomprises receiving a first group of candidates for a position from afirst source and receiving a second group of candidates for the positionfrom a second source. The method also comprises generating an idealprofile for the position based upon an incumbent survey of a group ofincumbents in the position and an at least one performance indicator ofthe incumbents, and generating a candidate profile based upon acandidate survey for each candidate in both groups. The method alsocomprises determining a result for each candidate in both groups basedupon the comparison of the candidate survey with the ideal profile andtracking a measurement of candidates from each group that receiveresults over a threshold result. The method also comprises using themeasurement of candidates from each group that receive results over thethreshold result to determine whether the first or the second source isthe more effective source for sourcing candidates and selecting the moreeffective source for sourcing candidates based on the measurement ofcandidates.

In another embodiment of the disclosure, a method for generating acondensed survey is provided. The method comprises creating a databasecomprising a plurality of dimensions, each dimension comprising two ormore items associated with a behavioral trait. The method also comprisesdetermining a first subset of dimensions from the plurality ofdimensions that is most predictive of a fit with a first position,generating a first condensed survey from the first subset of dimensions,determining a second subset of dimensions from the plurality ofdimensions that is most predictive of a fit with a second position, andgenerating a second condensed survey from the second subset ofdimensions. In an embodiment, a potential hire is either administeredthe first or the second condensed survey depending upon whether thepotential hire is being considered for the first or second position.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

For a more complete understanding of this disclosure, reference is nowmade to the following brief description, taken in connection with theaccompanying drawings and detailed description, wherein like referencenumerals represent like parts.

FIG. 1 illustrates an embodiment of the relationship of the individualquestions in a survey to the overall hierarchy.

FIG. 2 shows a method for scoring a survey according to an embodiment ofthe disclosure.

FIG. 3 shows a method for using a survey to generate a profile of anorganization according to an embodiment of the disclosure.

FIG. 4 is an illustration of ideal ranges plotted on a continuumaccording to an embodiment of the disclosure.

FIG. 5 shows a method for assessing a candidate according to anembodiment of the disclosure.

FIG. 6 illustrates a continuum with a candidate's dimension values shownin relation to ideal ranges according to an embodiment of thedisclosure.

FIG. 7 shows a method of testing a candidate using an optimized surveyaccording to an embodiment of the disclosure.

FIG. 8 illustrates the components of an optimized survey according to anembodiment of the disclosure.

FIG. 9 shows a method of determining the best source of qualitycandidates according to an embodiment of the disclosure.

FIG. 10 illustrates an exemplary general purpose computer systemsuitable for implementing the several embodiments of the disclosure.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

It should be understood at the outset that although an illustrativeimplementation of one or more embodiments are provided below, thedisclosed systems and/or methods may be implemented using any number oftechniques, whether currently known or in existence. The disclosureshould in no way be limited to the illustrative implementations,drawings, and techniques illustrated below, including the exemplarydesigns and implementations illustrated and described herein, but may bemodified within the scope of the appended claims along with their fullscope of equivalents.

When filling a vacant or new position, an organization typically reliesupon the information provided by a candidate on his or her resume or jobapplication. The organization then makes a decision on whether toprogress the candidate through the hiring process based upon thislimited information. One embodiment of the disclosure provides a methodand system for evaluating a candidate by determining the degree to whichthe candidate possesses certain behavioral traits that are predictive oftheir performance in a particular role. This provides an organizationwith a better feel and understanding of the candidate and how they willperform in a particular role. This evaluation is made by administering asurvey to a candidate. A candidate profile for the candidate is thencreated using the answers provided by the candidate on the survey. Thecandidate profile is then compared to an ideal profile for the positionthat is generated by surveying a range of incumbents in that position.In a typical embodiment, the ideal profile includes ranges of desirablescores for each behavioral trait and relative weightings of thesignificance of the traits. The closer a candidate's profile is to theideal profile, the better the fit the candidate is deemed to be for theposition.

One system and method of the disclosure provides an organization with away to evaluate a candidate by administering a shorter, more concisesurvey that focuses on certain behavioral traits that are determined tobe most predictive of a fit with a particular position. The condensedsurvey is generated by selecting questions that are known to measure thebehavioral traits of interest based on incumbent surveys.

Also, when multiple sources are used to fill a vacant or new position,one embodiment of the disclosure provides an organization with a way todetermine the most effective source of sourcing candidates for a vacantor new position. The disclosure provides for tracking candidates frommultiples sources and noting the number of quality candidates from eachsource. The organization is then provided with information, such as thetotal cost for each source, the total number of candidates received fromeach source, the number of quality candidates from each source, and thecost per quality candidate from each source. The organization can thenuse the information provided by this system and method of the disclosureto make a determination regarding which source or sources provide themwith the best return on their investment.

As stated earlier, a significant cost associated with filling a vacantor new position is in the selection of candidates to progress throughthe hiring process. When a position becomes vacant or a new position iscreated in an organization, multiple sources are typically utilized tofill the position. These sources include newspapers, Internet postings,and employment agencies. Most of these sources focus on the quantity ofcandidates produced rather than the quality of the candidates produced.Accordingly, most sources will produce a large number of candidates fromwhich typically only a few would merit an interview. The challenge forthe organization then becomes determining which candidates among thelarge pool of candidates merit the time and expense of an initial orfollow-up interview or more directly which candidates merit a job offer.

An important factor to consider in selecting candidates for interview ishow well the candidate's behavioral traits fit into the particularenvironment of an organization. Every organization has a workenvironment or “culture” that is unique to that organization.Accordingly, behavioral traits that may help a candidate in oneorganization may not help that candidate in another organization.Furthermore, different positions even within the same organization mayemphasize different behavioral traits. The better the fit of acandidate's behavioral traits with the position and organization, thebetter the chance the candidate will have of performing well at thatposition. Better performance leads to longer retention. Longer retentionleads to a reduction in the cost associated with employee turnover.Better performance also leads to a more productive and efficientworkforce. Therefore, it is important to take a candidate's behavioraltraits into consideration when deciding which candidates to interviewbecause the time and expense associated with interviews should not bespent on candidates with behavioral traits that would make it difficultfor them to succeed at a particular position within an organization.Accordingly, developing a profile of the organization will help todetermine how well a particular candidate will fit in with theorganization.

Generating a Company Profile

FIG. 1 illustrates an embodiment of the relationship of the individualquestions in a survey 100 to the overall hierarchy. Survey 100 would beadministered to the incumbent employees of an organization to develop aprofile of the organization. Survey 100 comprises a plurality ofquestions or items 102. Each item 102 has at least two possible answersor item options 104 and 106 associated with the item 102. Each item 102is also associated with a dimension 108, which is comprised of two ormore items. Each dimension 108 is associated with a particularbehavioral trait.

Behavioral traits may include high energy, numeric reasoning,independent, analytical, high need of recognition, detailed oriented,mature, verbal reasoning, dependent on others, ambition, emotionallyconsistent, discipline, introverted, disorganized, introverted,disorganized, pessimistic, subjective, inflexible, idealistic, lowenergy, conscientious, cooperative, accepting of authority, low need ofrecognition, irresponsible, immature, rebellious, competitive, apathy,emotionally inconsistent, long-range thinking, risk taker, organized,optimistic, mental flexibility, objective, flexible, and realistic.Behavioral traits may also include personality traits such as honesty,integrity, reliability, affability, and compassion. While specificlabels are applied to the various exemplary traits, one of ordinaryskill in the art would recognize that other behavioral traits or similartraits with different nomenclature could equally be useful.

Each dimension 108 is then associated with a composite 110, which iscomprised of two or more dimensions 108. Examples of composites includeinterpersonal style, work style, and culture fit. Furthermore, two ormore composites may be grouped together to form a parent composite 112.

While items 102 are depicted as having two item options 104 and 106 forease of illustration, persons of ordinary skill in the art willrecognize that items 102 may have any number of item options associatedwith them. Similarly, each dimension 108 may be associated with anynumber of items 102, and each composite 110 may be associated with anynumber of dimensions 108. Further, while each item 102 is shown asassociated with a single dimension 108, persons of ordinary skill in theart will recognize that in some circumstances, it may be beneficial foran item 102 to be associated with more than one dimension 108.Similarly, a dimension 108 may be associated with more than onecomposite 110. While the present embodiment is described in terms ofitems, dimensions, and composites, one of ordinary skill in the art willrecognize that any number of intermediate groupings may be implemented.

Survey 100 is administered to a group of the organization's incumbentemployees. The incumbent employees surveyed preferably include a rangeof performers rather than simply the high performing employees withregard to a performance indicator, a set of performance indicators, or aperformance index reflecting a set of performance indicators for aparticular situation. The performance indicator can be sales numbers,such as number of sales, dollars in sales, and units sold. Theperformance indicator can also be call center numbers, such as callsanswered, calls returned, and resolutions on first call. Individualcontribution numbers may also be a performance indicator. Individualcontribution numbers could include throughput, error rate, and qualityscore. Another performance indicator could be management numbers, suchas store sales, number of employees, number of direct reports, or totalnumber of reports. Customer service numbers, such as number ofcomplaints, number of compliments, and amount of gratuity, could also bea performance indicator. Numbers received during training could also bea performance indicator. The training numbers could include time spentin training, whether training was successfully completed, and rank orscores in training. These performance indicators could be considereddirect performance indicators because they provide a way of measuringperformance. Performance could also be measured by indirect performanceindicators, such as tenure and number of human resources complaints,which for the purposes of this disclosure will be included in thegeneral description of “performance indicators” or within the set ofperformance indicators. One of ordinary skill in the art will recognizethat any type and number of performance indicators could be used as theperformance indicator.

It is preferably that the surveyed sample includes both relatively highand relatively low performers with regard to the performance indicator.Some samples may include high, mid, and low performing incumbents. Thesample could be developed randomly or could be a controlled sample toinsure certain numbers or percentage of surveys from different pointswithin the performance continuum.

Once survey 100 has been administered to the group of incumbentemployees, FIG. 2 shows a method 200 for scoring survey 100 according toan embodiment of the disclosure. As established earlier, each item willhave two or more item options associated with it. In this case, eachitem 102 has two item options 104 and 106. Upon the selection of an itemoption, the candidate taking the survey will receive the numeric scoreassociated with the selected item option. This allows an organization toassign different weights to different items by the numeric scoresassociated with the items. The score for each dimension is calculated bysumming the scores received for all of the items associated with thedimension and dividing the sum by the total possible score for thatdimension (block 202). The score for each dimension is then normalizedto a range from 0 to a certain number (block 204). After each dimensionhas been normalized, the score for each composite is calculated bytaking a weighted average of all of the dimensions associated with thecomposite (block 206). As stated earlier, each dimension is associatedwith a particular behavioral trait such as high energy, numericreasoning, analytical, or discipline. Therefore, by taking a weightedaverage, certain behavioral traits can be given more emphasis dependingupon the position and organization involved. This emphasis can beaccomplished by simply increasing the weight of the dimensionsassociated with the behavioral traits of greater interest. The weightedaverage for each composite is then normalized on a range from 0 to theaverage number of standard deviations or some other defined number(block 208).

The following steps occur after the behavioral characteristic(dimension) scores for the incumbent employees have been calculated.FIG. 3 shows a method 300 for using survey 100 to generate a profile ofan organization according to an embodiment of the disclosure. The idealprofile creation process is a multi-algorithmic layered approach. Incombination, algorithms are layered to create decision rules which inturn detect natural behavioral patterns when pairs of individualassessment data (dimensions) and performance indicators (data) areanalyzed. This process yields a behavioral pattern that representsoptimal performance in a given situation. Through this process, theoutput is consistent, and an end user is able to understand andinterpret the method used by the system to arrive at the results. Theideal profile creation system is designed to detect behavioral patternsthat lend themselves to success in a given situation. The layeredalgorithmic process is not designed to predict future outcomes such asan individual's future tenure in a given position. Unlike systems thatemploy neural networks, the data is examined to detect behavioralpatterns or parameters designed to reflect optimal performance. Neuralnetworks tend to “over train” or “over fit” relationships among datathat predict unrealistic predictions. Additionally, a neural network istypically not capable of providing a sound repeatable explanation ortheoretical framework for the prediction outcome generated. Because ofthis tendency to find data relationships even where one does not exist,the results given by neural networks are not always consistent orcomprehensible, and a user does not always understand how the resultswere determined. Additionally, the end user of a traditional neuralnetwork is not able to provide deeper insight into the reasoning behindthe fit or non-fit of a person to a particular situation. Therefore, theresults obtained from a neural network are not able to be leveraged inlatter parts of an interview process or in the future development of anemployee.

Nonetheless, one of ordinary skill in the art will realize that whilesome advantages may be lost, certain advantages of other embodiments ofthe disclosure may still be obtained using neural networks.

When constructing an ideal profile (behavioral pattern), the objectiveis to determine the ideal range for each dimension on a continuum fromlow to high. This ideal range can be described as the optimal bandwidthexisting on a continuum that includes an abundance of higher performerswhile maintaining the greatest distance from other identified subgroups.An additional objective of constructing a behavioral pattern is todetermine the relative importance of each dimension being utilized. Thealgorithms may use many factors to determine the importance (weight) ofeach dimension. Factors such as the strength of the relationship amongpaired sets of data (dimension data and performance indicator data), thevariance of proven performance in the position, the distance betweenperformance subgroups, and other unique factors associated with thebehavioral data are collected. When calculating the ideal range, thelinear relationship between paired sets of data is observed (block 302).The magnitude of the relationship is the focal point not the direction.Both positive and negative relationships between paired data sets arevaluable. Additionally, performance subgroups are identified using theparameters provided by the organization (block 304). Next, the means andstandard deviations for the high performing and other performancesubgroups for each dimension are calculated (block 306). The mean andstandard deviations are leveraged as a starting point for a correctionprocedure (adjustment process of identifying the optimal position of theideal range along the continuum) of identified dimensions. Thecorrection procedure is designed to exclude outliers in order to obtainthe optimal bandwidth that captures the highest volume of highperformers while excluding the highest volume of alternative performancesubgroups. Simultaneously, the ideal range is centered on the greatestdistance from alternative performance subgroups. For effectivecorrection, the direction of the correction will depend upon the sign ordirection of the relationship.

Correction Procedure

Once any variance calculation, such as the standard deviation, of thehigh performing subgroup (starting point) for each dimension has beencalculated, the high and low thresholds for the ideal range arecalculated with guidance obtained from the direction or sign of therelationship (block 308). For example, if the relationship between apaired set of data was positive, the high threshold for the highperformers may be calculated by multiplying any value (larger than themultiple used to obtain the low threshold), such as the standarddeviation, by a number and adding that product to the average dimensionscore. The low threshold may be set by multiplying any value (smallerthan the multiple used to obtain the high threshold), such as thestandard deviation, by a number and subtracting that product from theaverage dimension score for the high performers. Conversely, in the caseof a negative relationship between a paired set of data, the highthreshold for the high performers would be calculated by multiplying anyvalue (smaller than the multiple used to obtain the low threshold), suchas the standard deviation, by a number and subtracting that product fromthe average dimension score. The low threshold may be set by multiplyingany value (larger than the multiple used to obtain the high threshold),such as the standard deviation, by a number and subtracting that productfrom the average dimension score. In either case, the mean is correctedto obtain the optimal range for each dimension, and the ideal range istightened in the optimal direction. The high and low thresholds for eachdimension would then be plotted on a continuum (block 310). The distancebetween the high and low thresholds may then be designated as the idealrange for that position such that the ideal range is not inclusive ofthe endpoints of the continuum.

By design, the ideal profile captures an optimal amount of eachdimension in the ideal profile. As a result, it is possible to scoremore than the desirable amount for any given dimension. For example, anindividual may have very high energy, and the ideal profile may call forhigh energy but not too high energy. Thus, the individual may havedifficulty being successful in the role because they may be seen ashyperactive and not able to slow down and move through the work relatedtasks in a steady pace even in a role or position where higher energy isgenerally viewed as desirable.

FIG. 4 is an illustration of ideal ranges plotted on a continuum 400according to an embodiment of the disclosure. In this embodiment, afirst side 402 represents one end of a behavioral trait, and a secondside 404 represents the opposite end of the behavioral trait. Forexample with regard to energy, low energy would represent one side ofthe behavioral trait, and high energy would represent the other side ofthe behavioral trait. Between first side 402 and second side 404, anideal range 406 for the particular behavioral trait is given. Again,ideal range 406 is determined by the scores for the high performers asdescribed earlier and is most typically not inclusive of the endpointsof continuum 400. Continuum 400 also shows a weight 408 associated witheach behavioral trait. Continuum 400 depicts the profile of theorganization with regard to these behavioral traits. While continuum 400shown as having only four behavioral traits for ease of illustration,persons of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that continuum 400may have any number of behavioral traits associated with it.

Generating an Assessment Report for a Candidate

Once the profile for the position in the organization has been createdand a candidate for the vacant position with the organization hascompleted survey 100, a candidate assessment is generated by comparingthe candidate's dimension values to the profile for the particularposition. Each position is supported by a profile that determines howeach candidate dimension is rated and how the dimension ratings arecombined. Profiles provide three pieces of information: the ideal value,the distribution length, and the weight. The ideal value is the optimalvalue for a candidate for a particular dimension. The closer aparticular candidate's dimension value is to the ideal value, the betterthe candidate's match is for that particular dimension. The ideal valuecan be obtained by assessing the high performers currently in theposition or can be provided by the organization itself. The distributionlength indicates how the distance between the candidate's dimensionvalue and the ideal dimension value affects the rating to be assigned tothe candidate's dimension. Typically, the larger the distributionlength, the less effect there is of separation from the ideal value. Theweight indicates how important a dimension is as a component of theoverall assessment rating for a candidate. Weight does not affect thecomputation of an individual dimension rating. Rather, it is appliedwhen combining dimension ratings to assign the relative importance ofthe dimension in the profile. Weight can be thought of as the percentagecontribution of a particular dimension towards the overall assessmentrating. Profiles for different positions may have different values forthese for these measures, but the process for using the data remains thesame.

FIG. 5 shows a method 500 for assessing a candidate according to anembodiment of the disclosure. The assessment begins by calculating thecandidate's dimension values based upon answers given by the candidateduring a test session (block 502). The dimension rating value for eachdimension is then calculated as the number of distribution lengths thatthe candidate's dimension value is away from the ideal value (block504). The smaller the rating value, the better match it represents. Eachdimension rating value is then communicated to the assessment reader ina way that makes it easier for the assessment reader to interpret thedimension rating value (block 506). For example, dimension rating valueswithin a first range of the ideal dimension values may be associatedwith a color symbol. Dimension rating values outside of the first rangebut within a second larger range of the ideal dimension values may beassociated with a different color symbol. The dimension rating valuesoutside of the second larger range would then be associated with a colorsymbol different from the first two color symbols. Therefore, by simplylooking at the color symbols, an assessment reader can easily interpretthe dimension rating values for the candidate. Though the ratings valuesare grouped and associated with symbols in this manner, the full numericrating value for each dimension is typically maintained internally as adecimal number to increase numeric precision and overall assessmentaccuracy although this is not necessary in all embodiments.

Another manner of communicating the dimension rating values is bydisplaying the candidate's dimension value in relation to the idealrange on a continuum. FIG. 6 illustrates continuum 400 with acandidate's dimension values 600 shown in relation to ideal ranges 406according to an embodiment of the disclosure.

Returning to FIG. 5, the rating value for each composite is thencalculated (block 508). The rating value of a composite is the weightedaverage of the rating values of its component dimensions. This forms ahierarchical tree of composites. The weights used to compute theweighted average are the dimension weights defined by the particularprofile. Accordingly, the weight of the resulting composite would be thesum of the weights of its component dimensions. Each composite ratingvalue is then communicated to the assessment readers in a way that makesit easier for the assessment reader to interpret the composite ratingvalue (block 510). For example, like the dimension rating values, eachcomposite rating value may be associated with a symbol that indicateshow far away the composite rating value is from the ideal value. Thecomposite rating values may use the same ranges as the dimension ratingvalues. As with the dimension numeric ratings, the full numeric ratingvalue for each composite may also be maintained internally as a decimalnumber to increase numeric precision and overall assessment accuracy.

Once the rating value for each composite has been calculated, the ratingvalue for any parent composite is calculated (block 512). Just asdimensions roll up to form composites, composites can also roll up toform parent composites forming a hierarchical tree of composites. Aswith computing composites from component dimensions, a parentcomposite's rating value is the weighted average of the rating values ofits component (child) composites. The parent composite will also have aweight equal to the sum of the child composite weights. Again, the fullnumeric rating value for each parent composite is typically maintainedinternally as a decimal number to increase numeric precision and overallassessment accuracy. A single overall composite is then determined forthe candidate (block 514). The overall composite represents the finalrating value for the candidate. Just as with the other scores, theoverall rating value is most commonly represented internally as adecimal number. The overall rating value is then translated into arating symbol, a recommendation statement, and a fit index score (block516). While in this embodiment a number of intermediate composite stagesare used to help a reviewer in understanding the feel and aggregation ofthe data, one of ordinary skill in the art would recognize that therepresentation could go directly from dimensions to an overall compositescore.

As with the dimension rating values and the composite rating values, therating symbol is assigned by identifying the symbol whose rating valuerange contains the overall rating value. For example, the rating symbolcan be a color symbol as described earlier, or it can be a thumbs-typeicon, such as thumbs up, thumbs down, or mixed thumbs.

Just as with the rating symbol, the assessment recommendation statementprovided to the assessment reader is associated with a range of ratingvalues. For example, a “recommended” statement may correspond to thethumbs up rating symbol. A “not recommended” statement may correspond tothe thumbs down rating symbol. A “recommended with qualifications”statement may correspond to the higher side of the mixed thumbs ratingsymbol, and a “recommended with reservations” statement would correspondto the lower side of the mixed thumbs rating symbol.

To generate the fit index score for a particular overall rating value, arange of rating values are defined. For each range, the low and high endpoints of the range have fixed fit index score values associated withthem. The system then identifies which of the rating value rangescontains the overall rating value. The system then applies linearinterpolation to compute the specific fit index score for the overallrating value based upon the location of the overall rating value withinthe range.

By providing an assessment reader with a rating symbol, a recommendationstatement, and a fit index score, the assessment reader is able todetermine very quickly whether to select the candidate for progressionthrough the interview process such as for an initial interview, afollow-up interview, or a job offer. The ability to quickly assesscandidates is particular useful in situations in which large volumes ofcandidates are applying for a position. More time can be focused on thecandidates who are more likely to perform well in a position.

Another advantage to the disclosed assessment report lies in thegrouping of items into dimensions and composites. By grouping the itemsinto dimensions and composites and scoring the dimensions and compositesindividually, the assessment reader is able to see how the candidaterates with regard to each area covered by the assessment. The assessmentreader gets a better feel for the candidate because the assessmentreader not only receives a fit index score but also receives all of theintermediary dimension and composite rating values that were used toarrive at the overall rating value. This provides the assessment readerwith a breakdown of the strengths and weaknesses of the candidate. Insome cases, the assessment reader may determine that the weaknesses of aparticular candidate can be overcome with the proper coaching. Thiswould not be possible if the assessment reader was simply given anoverall assessment with no supporting data.

Having these intermediary values would be helpful, for example, to arecruiter in order to place a candidate in a position that emphasizesthe candidate's strengths and minimizes the candidate's weaknesses.Also, rather than simply telling a candidate that they were not selectedfor an interview because his or her fit index was too low, a recruiteror organization can actually tell a candidate what areas caused the fitindex to be low.

Such advantages are not provided by predictive assessments that merelypredict how long a candidate will stay at a particular position. Suchassessments do not tell an assessment reader how the system arrived atsuch predictions. The receivers of these assessments must rely on thefact that only relevant information was considered in reaching theprediction and that there was an actual correlation between theinformation considered and the prediction given.

Optimized Testing

As stated earlier, each dimension evaluated by survey 100 is associatedwith a particular behavioral trait such as high energy, numericreasoning, analytical, or discipline. Each dimension utilizes a standardset of questions that are applied to all candidates who are tested forthat particular dimension. The questions have an established history andunderstanding behind them. The questions are stable and onlyinfrequently changed if at all. The idea behind optimized testing isobtaining the most relevant candidate assessment using the fewest numberof questions. For some positions, it is not necessarily cost effectiveto assess the candidate in all possible dimensions in the system inorder to get an accurate assessment because certain behavioral traitswill be far more predictive of fit than others. In such cases, anorganization determines which dimensions are most predictive, and anoptimized survey is created centered around those dimensions. Thisallows an accurate assessment to be made with a shorter, more concisequestion set without changing the standard questions or changing thequestions used in relation to a particular dimension.

FIG. 7 shows a method 700 of testing a candidate using an optimizedsurvey according to an embodiment of the disclosure. The particulardimensions of importance to a position are identified in a profile(block 702). The weight given to each dimension is provided by theprofile (block 704). The question items corresponding to the identifieddimensions are then identified (block 706). An optimized survey is thengenerated using the items corresponding to the identified dimensions(block 708). The optimized survey is then administered to a candidatefor the position (block 710). A fit index for the candidate is thendetermined based upon the answers given by the candidate and the weightassigned to each dimension (block 712).

FIG. 8 illustrates the components of an optimized survey according to anembodiment of the disclosure. In this embodiment, a standardizedquestion set 802 includes six dimensions 804 a, 804 b, 804 c, 804 d, 804e, and 804 f. Each dimension 804 includes three questions or items 806 a1, 806 a 2, 806 a 3, . . . 806 f 1, 806 f 2, 806 f 3. A profile 808 isshown indicating that dimensions 804 a, 804 c, and 804 e and theircorresponding weights 810 a, 810 b, and 810 c are associated withprofile 808. Optimized survey 800 is then created containing items 806of dimensions 804 a, 804 c, and 804 e from standardized question set 802as indicated in profile 808. An assessment report 812 is then generatedfrom the answers given by the candidate on optimized survey 800 and theweight assigned to each dimension.

The disclosed method and system does not generate the optimized surveyby using cyclic refinement of item questions. Methods that utilizecyclic refinement typically place an item or question into a pool ofquestions and monitor that item in subsequent cycles of testing todetermine whether it is effective or not. If the item is determined tobe ineffective after subsequent testing, it is removed from the questionset. This type of cyclic refinement takes place over a period of timeafter several cycles and is indicative of a method that utilizes itemsor questions with no established history or understanding behind them.Therefore, the items must be monitored to determine their effectiveness.

By contrast, the disclosed method uses a standard question set with anestablished history and understanding behind them. The effectiveness ofthese questions has already been established through extensive use intesting. Therefore, there is no need to monitor them in order todetermine their effectiveness. In one embodiment, the changes from oneoptimized survey to another are the dimensions tested and the weightsgiven to the particular dimensions.

Tracking Candidate Sourcing Campaigns

As stated earlier, the costs associated with identifying and hiring fora vacant position include advertising, an employment agency, employeereferral award, Internet posting and other forms of announcing theavailability of the position. When multiple candidate sourcing campaignsare used, it would be helpful for an organization to quickly determinewhich campaign or campaigns provide the better return on investment.Having this information helps to reduce the cost associated withemployee turnover.

FIG. 9 shows a method 900 of determining the best source of qualitycandidates according to an embodiment of the disclosure. In thisembodiment, method 900 begins by placing campaigns for a vacant positionin an organization through multiple providers such a newspaper, anInternet posting, and an employment agency (block 902). The costassociated with each campaign is tracked (block 904). The total numberof candidates obtained from each campaign is also tracked (block 906). Afit index score is then obtained for each candidate from each campaign(block 908). The number of candidates from each campaign that receives afit index score above a threshold fit index score (i.e., the number ofquality candidates) is also tracked (block 910). Information, such asthe cost associated with each campaign, the total number of candidatesreceived from each campaign, and the total number of quality candidates,received from each campaign is used to provide the organization withinformation that allows the organization to determine which campaignsource provides the organization with the best return on its investment.Such information may include cost per quality candidate by source, costper hire by source, and quality candidates by source. The organizationis better able to determine where to spend its money. For example, ifthe organization determines that the most important factor is the totalnumber of quality candidates that each source produces, then theorganization would look at number of quality candidates by source. Onthe other hand, if the organization is more interested in the cost ofobtaining each quality candidate, then the organization would look atthe cost per quality candidate by source. In either case, theorganization is able to use the information provided by the method todetermine which campaign or campaigns are the best source of candidatesfor it and select and do business with those providers. A source may bemultiple campaigns with one provider, each of which is a source orindividual campaign. A source may also be individual campaigns with eachof multiple providers or both. In such cases, the candidates could betracked by provider, as well as by campaign. Information, such as costby provider, campaign costs across multiple providers, or campaignresults across multiple providers, could be provided to theorganization.

The system described above may be implemented on any general-purposecomputer with sufficient processing power, memory resources, and networkthroughput capability to handle the necessary workload placed upon it.FIG. 10 illustrates a typical, general-purpose computer system suitablefor implementing one or more embodiments disclosed herein. The computersystem 380 includes a processor 382 (which may be referred to as acentral processor unit or CPU) that is in communication with memorydevices including secondary storage 384, read only memory (ROM) 386,random access memory (RAM) 388, input/output (I/O) 390 devices, andnetwork connectivity devices 392. The processor may be implemented asone or more CPU chips.

The secondary storage 384 is typically comprised of one or more diskdrives or tape drives and is used for non-volatile storage of data andas an over-flow data storage device if RAM 388 is not large enough tohold all working data. Secondary storage 384 may be used to storeprograms which are loaded into RAM 388 when such programs are selectedfor execution. The ROM 386 is used to store instructions and perhapsdata which are read during program execution. ROM 386 is a non-volatilememory device which typically has a small memory capacity relative tothe larger memory capacity of secondary storage. The RAM 388 is used tostore volatile data and perhaps to store instructions. Access to bothROM 386 and RAM 388 is typically faster than to secondary storage 384.

I/O devices 390 may include printers, video monitors, liquid crystaldisplays (LCDs), touch screen displays, keyboards, keypads, switches,dials, mice, track balls, voice recognizers, card readers, paper tapereaders, or other well-known input devices. The network connectivitydevices 392 may take the form of modems, modem banks, Ethernet cards,universal serial bus (USB) interface cards, serial interfaces, tokenring cards, fiber distributed data interface (FDDI) cards, wirelesslocal area network (WLAN) cards, radio transceiver cards such as codedivision multiple access (CDMA) and/or global system for mobilecommunications (GSM) radio transceiver cards, and other well-knownnetwork devices. These network connectivity devices 392 may enable theprocessor 382 to communicate with an Internet or one or more intranets.With such a network connection, it is contemplated that the processor382 might receive information from the network, or might outputinformation to the network in the course of performing theabove-described method steps. Such information, which is oftenrepresented as a sequence of instructions to be executed using processor382, may be received from and outputted to the network, for example, inthe form of a computer data signal embodied in a carrier wave

Such information, which may include data or instructions to be executedusing processor 382 for example, may be received from and outputted tothe network, for example, in the form of a computer data baseband signalor signal embodied in a carrier wave. The baseband signal or signalembodied in the carrier wave generated by the network connectivitydevices 392 may propagate in or on the surface of electrical conductors,in coaxial cables, in waveguides, in optical media, for example opticalfiber, or in the air or free space. The information contained in thebaseband signal or signal embedded in the carrier wave may be orderedaccording to different sequences, as may be desirable for eitherprocessing or generating the information or transmitting or receivingthe information. The baseband signal or signal embedded in the carrierwave, or other types of signals currently used or hereafter developed,referred to herein as the transmission medium, may be generatedaccording to several methods well known to one skilled in the art.

The processor 382 executes instructions, codes, computer programs,scripts which it accesses from hard disk, floppy disk, optical disk(these various disk based systems may all be considered secondarystorage 384), ROM 386, RAM 388, or the network connectivity devices 392.

While several embodiments have been provided in the present disclosure,it should be understood that the disclosed systems and methods may beembodied in many other specific forms without departing from the spiritor scope of the present disclosure. The present examples are to beconsidered as illustrative and not restrictive, and the intention is notto be limited to the details given herein. For example, the variouselements or components may be combined or integrated in another systemor certain features may be omitted, or not implemented.

Also, techniques, systems, subsystems and methods described andillustrated in the various embodiments as discrete or separate may becombined or integrated with other systems, modules, techniques, ormethods without departing from the scope of the present disclosure.Other items shown or discussed as coupled or directly coupled orcommunicating with each other may be indirectly coupled or communicatingthrough some interface, device, or intermediate component whetherelectrically, mechanically, or otherwise. Other examples of changes,substitutions, and alterations are ascertainable by one skilled in theart and could be made without departing from the spirit and scopedisclosed herein.

1. A method of selecting potential hires for progression through ahiring process, comprising: selecting at least one performance indicatorfor a position; obtaining the at least one performance indicator for aplurality of incumbents in the position; placing each incumbent in theplurality of incumbents along a performance continuum according to theirperformance indicator; surveying incumbents from at least both halves ofthe performance continuum; generating an ideal profile for the positionbased upon the incumbent survey and the at least one performanceindicator of the incumbents; using a survey to generate a candidateprofile of a potential hire; comparing the candidate profile of thepotential hire with the ideal profile for the position to determine aresult for the potential hire; and determining whether to progress thepotential hire to a next stage in the hiring process based upon theresult.
 2. The method of claim 1, wherein the performance indicator isselected from the group consisting of sales numbers, call centernumbers, management numbers, individual contribution numbers, customerservice numbers, and training numbers.
 3. The method of claim 1, whereinthe performance indicator is a direct performance indicator.
 4. Themethod of claim 1, wherein the performance indicator is an indirectperformance indicator.
 5. The method of claim 1, wherein the incumbentssurveyed also include incumbents in the middle of the performancecontinuum.
 6. The method of claim 1, wherein the survey used for theincumbents and the survey used for the potential hire are the samesurvey.
 7. The method of claim 1, wherein the result is selected fromthe group consisting of an overall rating value, a fit index, arecommendation statement, and a rating symbol.
 8. The method of claim 1,wherein the potential hire is selected to progress to an interview. 9.The method of claim 1, wherein the potential hire is selected toprogress to a job offer.
 10. A system for selecting potential hires forprogression through a hiring process, comprising: a survey completed bya potential hire for a position and a plurality of incumbents in theposition, the plurality of incumbents including both high performers andlow performers relative to an identified performance indicator; acandidate profile of the potential hire generated by analyzing thesurvey completed by the potential hire; an ideal profile for theposition generated by analyzing the surveys completed by the pluralityof incumbents; and a result for the potential hire generated bycomparing the candidate profile of the potential hire with the idealprofile for the position; wherein a determination of whether to progressthe potential hire is made based upon the result.
 11. The system ofclaim 10, wherein the performance indicator is selected from the groupconsisting of sales numbers, call center numbers, management numbers,individual contribution numbers, customer service numbers, and trainingnumbers.
 12. The system of claim 10, wherein the performance indicatoris a direct performance indicator.
 13. The system of claim 10, whereinthe performance indicator is an indirect performance indicator.
 14. Thesystem of claim 10, wherein the incumbents surveyed also includeincumbents in the middle of the performance continuum.
 15. The system ofclaim 10, wherein the survey used for the incumbents and the survey usedfor the potential hire are the same survey.
 16. The system of claim 10,wherein the result is selected from the group consisting of an overallrating value, a fit index, a recommendation statement, and a ratingsymbol.
 17. The system of claim 10, wherein the potential hire isselected to progress to an interview.
 18. The system of claim 10,wherein the potential hire is selected to progress to a job offer.
 19. Amethod of determining an ideal range for a behavioral trait for aposition at a company, comprising: having a plurality of incumbents in aposition complete a survey comprising a group of two or more items, thegroup of items corresponding to the behavioral trait, and the pluralityof incumbents including both high performers and low performers relativeto an identified performance indicator; plotting the results of thesurvey for the plurality of incumbents on a continuum; determining anideal range for the behavioral trait based upon the results of the highperformers; and determining where the ideal range falls on thecontinuum; wherein the ideal range is between but not inclusive of theendpoints of the continuum.
 20. The method of claim 19, furthercomprising: having the survey comprise a plurality of groups of items,each group corresponding to a different behavioral trait; anddetermining the ideal range for each behavioral trait.
 21. The method ofclaim 20, further comprising: administering the survey to a potentialhire; and providing to a survey reader the results for each behavioraltrait.
 22. The method of claim 20, further comprising assigning varyingweights of importance to each group of items.
 23. A method ofdetermining the more effective source for sourcing candidates,comprising: receiving a first group of candidates for a position from afirst source; receiving a second group of candidates for the positionfrom a second source; generating an ideal profile for the position basedupon a first survey of a group of incumbents in the position and an atleast one performance indicator of the incumbents; generating acandidate profile based upon a candidate survey for each candidate inboth groups; determining a result for each candidate in both groupsbased upon the comparison of the candidate survey with the idealprofile; tracking a measurement of candidates from each group thatreceive results over a threshold result; using the measurement ofcandidates from each group that receive results over the thresholdresult to determine whether the first or the second source is the moreeffective source for sourcing candidates; and selecting the moreeffective source for sourcing candidates based on the measurement ofcandidates.
 24. The method of claim 23, wherein the first source isselected from the group consisting of an employment agency, an Internetposting, and a newspaper advertising.
 25. The method of claim 23,wherein the second source is selected from the group consisting of anemployment agency, an Internet posting, and a newspaper advertising. 26.The method of claim 23, wherein the first and second sources are fromthe same provider.
 27. The method of claim 23, further comprisingproviding an organization associated with the position with anassessment of the sources.
 28. The method of claim 27, wherein theassessment is selected from the group consisting of a cost per candidateover the threshold result, a cost per hire, a candidate flow byposition, a candidate over the threshold result by source, and acandidate over the threshold result by position.
 29. The method of claim27, wherein the determination of determine whether the first or thesecond source is the more effect source for sourcing candidates is madeby also considering a secondary factor.
 30. The method of claim 29,wherein the secondary factor is selected from the group consisting ofeducation, work experience, skill level, and training.
 31. The method ofclaim 29, wherein the threshold result is an average of the results forall of the candidates.
 32. A method for generating a condensed survey,comprising: creating a database comprising a plurality of dimensions,each dimension comprising two or more items associated with a behavioraltrait; determining a first subset of dimensions from the plurality ofdimensions that is most predictive of a fit with a first position;generating a first condensed survey from the first subset of dimensions;determining a second subset of dimensions from the plurality ofdimensions that is most predictive of a fit with a second position; andgenerating a second condensed survey from the second subset ofdimensions; wherein a potential hire is either administered the first orthe second condensed survey depending upon whether the potential hire isbeing considered for the first or second position.
 33. The method ofclaim 32, wherein the dimensions in the first and second condensedsurvey are assigned varying weights of importance.
 34. The method ofclaim 32, wherein the first and second subsets of dimensions areassociated respectively with a first and second profile.